educating students for multicultural community practice

This article was downloaded by: [Northeastern University]On: 03 November 2014, At: 16:59Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Journal of Community PracticePublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcom20

Educating Students forMulticultural CommunityPracticeLorraine Gutiérrez PhD a & Ann Rosegrant AlvarezPhD ba School of Social Work and Department ofPsychology , University of Michigan , USAb School of Social Work , Wayne State University ,USAPublished online: 11 Oct 2008.

To cite this article: Lorraine Gutiérrez PhD & Ann Rosegrant Alvarez PhD (2000)Educating Students for Multicultural Community Practice, Journal of CommunityPractice, 7:1, 39-56, DOI: 10.1300/J125v07n01_04

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J125v07n01_04

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wcom20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1300/J125v07n01_04

http://dx.doi.org/10.1300/J125v07n01_04

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Educating Students forMulticultural Community Practice

Lorraine Gutiérrez, PhDAnn Rosegrant Alvarez, PhD

SUMMARY. This article explores the concept of multicultural com-munity organizing and some of the issues and dilemmas involved ineducating for this form of practice. It then outlines the development of acourse on multicultural community organizing and describes experi-ences in teaching it; specific teaching strategies and methodologies,including exercises and assignments; and outcomes for students, educa-tors, and communities. Social work educators are encouraged to consid-er ways to incorporate these and similar perspectives, methods, andexercises throughout the community practice curriculum, so that anawareness of multicultural dynamics and issues can be part of under-standing and determining the use of tactics. [Article copies available for afee from The Haworth Document Delivery Service: 1-800-342-9678. E-mailaddress: [email protected] <Website: http://www.haworthpressinc.com>]

Lorraine Gutiérrez is Associate Professor, School of Social Work and Depart-ment of Psychology, University of Michigan.

Ann Rosegrant Alvarez is Assistant Professor, School of Social Work, WayneState University.

Address correspondence to: Lorraine Gutiérrez, School of Social Work, 2778SSWB, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1106.

An earlier version of this article was presented at the ACOSA Symposium of the44th Annual Program Meeting of the Council on Social Work Education, March1998, Orlando, FL.

[Haworth co-indexing entry note]: ‘‘Educating Students for Multicultural Community Practice.’’Gutiérrez, Lorraine, and Ann Rosegrant Alvarez. Co-published simultaneously in Journal of CommunityPractice (The Haworth Press, Inc.) Vol. 7, No. 1, 2000, pp. 39-56; and Innovative Approaches forTeaching Community Organization Skills in the Classroom (ed: Donna Hardina) The Haworth Press, Inc.,2000, pp. 39-56. Single or multiple copies of this article are available for a fee from The Haworth DocumentDelivery Service [1-800-342-9678, 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. (EST). E-mail address: [email protected]].

E 2000 by The Haworth Press, Inc. All rights reserved. 39

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

40 Innovative Approaches for Teaching Community Organization Skills

KEYWORDS. Multicultural, community practice, social work educa-tion, tactics

INTRODUCTION

Over the past 30 years social work and social workers have focusedgreater attention on models for practice that recognize the significanceof race, gender, and ethnicity in social and community life (Davis &Proctor, 1989; Iglehart & Becerra, 1995). In these past three decades,models for ethnically sensitive practice (Devore & Schlesinger, 1987),ethnic competence (Gallegos, 1984), cultural competence (Lum, 1992)and multicultural practice (Carlton-LaNey & Andrews, 1998; Gutiér-rez, 1996) have been developed. However, in the development of thesemodels the critical role of community organizers has often been over-looked. This is particularly true in the literature on education formulticultural practice. As our society becomes increasingly diverse, itwill be particularly important for community organizers to learn thestrategies, tactics and techniques that are needed to work effectivelywith people of widely varied backgrounds and experiences (Bradshaw,Soifer & Gutiérrez, 1993; Burghardt, 1982; Gutiérrez & Lewis, 1994;Rivera & Erlich, 1995).

In this paper we explore the concept of multicultural communityorganizing and its implications for educating community organizers.We begin by positing a definition of multicultural organizing and theknowledge, values, and skills it may require. We then outline some ofthe issues and dilemmas involved in educating for this form of prac-tice. In the central section, we share our experiences in teachingcourses on multicultural community organizing. We conclude with ourperspective on outcomes we have observed for students, educators,and communities, and implications for teaching and learning aboutmulticultural community practice.

UNDERSTANDING MULTICULTURAL ORGANIZING

Only recently have we begun to understand and study the implica-tions of multiculturalism for community organization (Gutiérrez, Al-varez, Nemon & Lewis, 1996). The literature has defined it as aperspective on practice that recognizes and values the experiences and

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

Lorraine Gutiérrez and Ann Rosegrant Alvarez 41

contributions of different social groups within a community whileworking to bring groups together as necessary. It is built upon apluralistic foundation, but goes beyond pluralism by recognizing andworking to eliminate social injustices and oppression based on groupmembership (Gutiérrez et al., 1996). Therefore, multicultural organiz-ing practice recognizes and values cultural diversity while working todismantle structures of inequality (Alvarez & Gutiérrez, 1997; Gutiér-rez & Lewis, 1994; Medoff & Sklar, 1994).

The literature on cultural competence (Green, 1995; Lum, 1992)has identified the dimensions of knowledge, values and skills thoughtto be necessary for multicultural practice with any size system. Theseinclude knowledge about specific groups; the meaning of central con-cepts such as identity, culture and inequality; and an understanding ofone’s own social location. Necessary values include an acceptance ofand appreciation of the importance of standpoint and an openness todifferent perspectives. Skills needed include the ability to communi-cate effectively across differences, to take the role of learner, to be‘‘comfortable’’ in situations of discomfort, and to build alliances be-tween groups (Reed, Newman, Suarez & Lewis, 1997).

In addition to these general skills for cultural competence, multicul-tural community work also requires knowledge regarding the historyand structure of communities of color in order to recognize and buildupon ways in which people of color have worked to improve condi-tions within their communities (Carlton-LaNey & Burwell, 1996).Therefore, understanding how movements for equality and civil rightshave been built upon existing relations within churches, voluntaryorganizations, and the workplace is critical for multicultural commu-nity organizers (Munoz, 1989; West, 1990). Working with and build-ing upon community resources and institutions is an important meansfor identifying and using community strengths while institutionalizingand building leadership and structures (Delgado & Humm-Delgado,1982).

The literature on multicultural practice has focused more on theseforms of knowledge or understanding than on specific skills for prac-tice. However, a multicultural perspective requires the development ofskills and behaviors in addition to these perspectives and self under-standing. These include skills to mix and phase different approachesaccording to the community, its needs and strengths, and the resourcesavailable (Bradshaw et al., 1993). Multicultural organizers must also

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


develop skills to learn from communities. This involves awareness ofone’s own understanding of the community, finding ways to learnmore about the local community through key informants, working aspartners to develop local leadership, identifying and building fromcommunity strengths, and focusing on ways to build cohesivenesswithin and between ethnic communities. The critical role of the orga-nizer is that of learner who approaches the community to understandand facilitate change (Bradshaw et al., 1993; Green, 1995; Rivera &Erlich, 1995).

When teaching or learning about multicultural community organiz-ing, it is important to emphasize aspects of self-awareness--what Burg-hardt (1982) coined, ‘‘the other side of organizing.’’ Another crucialelement of multicultural organizing is the development of techniquesand tactics. Practitioners must learn how to assess and build on theirown strengths in this process. Additionally, an understanding of ap-propriate tactics and their use in a specific situation should be groundedin a careful analysis and understanding of how the history, needs andresources represented within a community are related to its cultural andstructural dimensions (Netting, Kettner & McMurty, 1995; Rivera &Erlich, 1995). In this way the selection of tactics will be informed by adeeper understanding of ways in which the community’s assets andresources can be maximized and mobilized in conjunction with agiven group or individual.

EDUCATION FOR MULTICULTURALCOMMUNITY PRACTICE

Issues and Approaches

A central question about teaching multicultural organizing iswhether it is preferable to infuse the content into as many courses aspossible, or to present it as the clear focus of one or more separatecourses (Garcia & Van Soest, 1997; Schoem, Frankel, Zuniga, &Lewis, 1993; Van Soest, 1994). The arguments for inclusion are that itresults in more people being exposed to the content and does notcreate an artificial distinction between practice and the application of amulticultural perspective. On the negative side, ‘‘inclusion’’ some-times results in minimal and/or inadequate coverage of multicultural

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


issues due to constraints of time and material to be covered, or tofaculty resistance or lack of knowledge of the subject matter. Theadvantages of separate offerings are that students who take them areprobably genuinely interested in the content, faculty who teach themshould have interest and expertise in the subject, and the coursesprovide the opportunity to consider issues in depth. The disadvantagesare: students (and faculty) who do not wish to struggle with the is-sues--but who may most need to--do not have to, and the multiculturalperspective may be viewed as something separate from daily socialwork practice life, rather than an integral part of it.

Recognizing the advantages of both approaches, we prefer andrecommend a combination of the two. Both to familiarize more stu-dents with multicultural practice and to allow faculty and students topursue these issues with greater focus and depth, we believe that it ispreferable and viable for the curriculum to feature thorough and moni-tored infusion, as well as separate offerings that are specifically multi-cultural. The authors have had experience with both approaches: in-fusing multicultural content into general courses on macro practice,community organizing, or generalist practice; and teaching a special-ized course in multicultural community organizing. While this paperfocuses on the specific example of a course on multicultural practice,many of the concepts, exercises and assignments can be incorporatedinto more general courses as well. In the remainder of this paper, wewill describe very specifically how we teach students the concepts,skills and tactics of multicultural community organizing. We do this inthe belief that the literature is more replete with well-developed prin-ciples on the topic than with concrete suggestions on how to actualizethese principles.

Development of a Course on Multicultural Community Organizing

The course this paper focuses on has evolved from what was origi-nally created by a group of faculty at the University of MichiganSchool of Social Work.1 This group of faculty was diverse with re-spect to race, gender and ethnicity as well as level and field of prac-tice. The purpose of their work together was to create a separatecourse that would incorporate what they knew about multiculturalpractice into the CO curriculum. The result of this effort was a onesemester (14 week) course that examined concepts and techniques ofmulticultural, multilingual organizing. The content of this initial

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


course was primarily theoretical, with less emphasis placed on ‘‘tech-niques and tactics’’ and more on understanding themes for practice(e.g., the importance of language, intergroup and intragroup differ-ences, and implications of multiculturalism for defining communi-ties). This course was a significant first step in understanding how tocreate curriculum in this area.

Since that initial semester, this course has taken different forms.Some instructors have focused primarily on developing skills for‘‘cultural competence’’ and then have woven them into different typesof community practice (e.g., social action, community development,community education). Others have organized the course and readingsto give separate consideration to topics such as language and commu-nication (Delpit, 1988; Heskin & Heffner, 1987); race and ethnicity(McMahon & Allen-Meares, 1992; Zuniga & Nagda, 1993); genderand sexual orientation (Albrecht & Brewer, 1990; Chow, 1989; Rosen-thal, 1996; Weil, 1986); class and socio-economic status (Stout, 1996);age (Burnette, 1997; Kam, 1996); and differing abilities (McGuire,1994; Silverman, 1997).

Each approach has its strengths and limitations. The first ap-proach requires that students do much of the work to learn aboutissues specific to different groups. By focusing on the processes ofmulticulturalism rather than group difference, it places emphasis onthe responsibility of workers to engage in this learning indepen-dently. The second approach works well with many readings thatare available with these topical focuses, and lends itself to high-lighting various oppressed populations. It requires caution, howev-er, so that students don’t end up with drastically compartmentalizedperspectives. It is important to maintain constant awareness thateach ‘‘category’’ represents only one facet of any individual, andthat practitioners need to be conscious of interlinking and overlap-ping facets. For example, if we are considering the elderly as aseparate culture, it is important to recognize that, whatever groupcommonality may exist, each additional categorical layer will af-fect the worldview and experience of an individual who is old . . .and who also may be, for example, male, gay, poor, bi-lingual, andwith no physical disability; or female, heterosexual, middle-in-come, and having a visual impairment.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


Experience with Teaching Multicultural Community Organizing

Our discussion of a specialized course on multicultural communityorganizing includes consideration of the following aspects or compo-nents: participants, format, setting ground rules, the Cultural Compe-tence Contract, action projects, and the final paper. We present infor-mation and methods in concrete detail because our interactions withcolleagues have convinced us that many are eager to learn aboutspecifics, to adopt or adapt as appropriate.

Participants. Over the past five years, more than 100 students haveparticipated in these courses (see Table 1 for characteristics). Theyinclude both ‘‘macro’’ and ‘‘micro’’ focused students. In fact, a full50% of the students have been in the Interpersonal Practice Concentra-

TABLE 1. Characteristics of Students Enrolled in Multicultural/Multilingual Or-ganizing, 1995-1997

GenderMale 12%Female 88%

Race/EthnicityAfrican American 14%Asian American 17%European American 60%Arab American 2%Latino 5%Native American 2%

ConcentrationInterpersonal Practice 50%CO/Policy/Administration 47%Other (e.g., Education, Public Health, 3%Public Policy, etc.)

Multicultural Experience 98%

Goals for the ClassGain self-awareness 6%Develop CO skills 46%Gain understanding of other groups 20%Develop cultural sensitivity 29%

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


tion. The course has also attracted students from departments otherthan social work. It has been one of the most ethnically and raciallydiverse of the macro practice offerings. The majority of the studentsdescribe themselves as having multicultural experience. This includessuch activities as international development work, facilitating a sup-port group for women of color, and living as a person of color in theUnited States. Many of the students have been involved in cross-cul-tural work in the United States and throughout the world. Most oftentheir goals are to learn specific skills of multicultural organizing suchas methods for developing multiethnic coalitions, creating programswith communities of color, or developing community education arounddiversity issues.

The composition of the class affects course dynamics and direction.The high degree of diversity within the class, compared to the normfor the School, appears to support the hypothesis that those enrollingin such a specialized course might have both more interest in, andpossibly less need for, such content than those who do not select it.That many of the students report past multicultural experience alsobolsters this thesis. The fact that this is a macro course with highenrollment of non-macro concentrators also has consequences. It hascreated interesting challenges in terms of initiating many students toconcepts and perspectives with which they are unfamiliar, while inte-grating them with others who are well acquainted with the basics andwant to expand on them. Finally, many of the students express theirgoals for the course in terms of gaining skills with multiculturalism,communities of color, and diversity. Clearly, therefore, in this special-ized course we have the advantage of working with students whoalready may have some awareness of the issues, are interested in thetopic, and expect that the knowledge and skills they are acquiring willbenefit them personally and professionally. Additionally, the multicul-tural experiences students bring to the class are resources that areshared with the entire group, enriching both process and content.

Format. The course is based on principles of feminist pedagogy(Figueira-McDonough, Netting, & Nichols-Casebolt, 1998; hooks, 1984;Weiler, 1994) and active learning (Freire, 1970, 1974), and focuses onthe development of self-awareness, information about others, andskills for cross cultural learning. Class time is spent with interactiveexercises and class presentations by students and guest speakers whocan model reflective practice. Specific class sessions are set up for

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


integrating and reflecting upon the material that has been covered.Assignments for the class have included the planning and fulfillmentof a ‘‘Cultural Competence Contract,’’ an action project, a group caseconsultation, and a synthesis paper.

Setting ‘‘ground rules’’ for multicultural interaction. A critical ele-ment of multicultural teaching involves the establishment of normsand a positive environment for dealing with potentially conflictual anddifficult issues. This can be accomplished through a discussion ofstudents’ concerns about multicultural issues and the generation ofnorms and expectations. We developed a structured exercise that elic-its concerns and involves students actively in the process of devel-oping norms. This process, which can take an entire class period, ispreferable to simply handing out a list of previously developed ‘‘groundrules’’ because it engages students in the process of understanding theconcerns of their fellow students and collaborating to address theseconcerns. It also allows the instructor and students a glimpse into themyriad issues that participants can bring into a multicultural situation.The insights gained from this exercise can be generalized to under-standing the issues that arise when doing multicultural work withcommunities.

In this exercise, students (anonymously) write their greatest con-cern regarding discussing multicultural issues on an index card. Stu-dents are then divided up into small groups of six to eight and the cardsare shuffled and distributed, one to each person. The group’s task is toread each concern aloud and to discuss the following: (1) What is thisconcern? What does it reflect? (2) How can we establish a norm or‘‘ground rule’’ for the course that addresses this concern?2 These con-cerns and norms are written on newsprint and shared with the class. Theground rules are then typed and distributed to the class at the followingclass session. Table 2 summarizes some typical concerns and correspond-ing rules generated by a recent class.

This table reflects the genuine concerns that students bring tocourses on multiculturalism, which are co-extensive with many of theconcerns they may bring to multicultural practice. Within the coursethe concept of ‘‘parallel process’’ is used to emphasize that as studentswork out these issues of conflict and communication with each otherin the class they are gaining skills that they can then translate into the‘‘real world.’’ For example, this approach to identifying and sharingconcerns can be adapted for use with multicultural community groups.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


TABLE 2. Representative Results from the Ground Rules Exercise

Concerns Ground Rules

1. Individuals with different 1. We will be open to differentcommunication communication styles, including

silence.

2. Lack of relevance to ‘‘real 2. Make connections from classworld’’ situations discussion to ‘‘real world’’ situations.

3. Having limited exposure and 3. Be honest about our limitations andknowledge awareness.

4. Not feeling ‘‘safe’’ to take risks 4. Create a safe environment throughchallenging ideas rather thanlabeling or attacking individuals.

This is one way that the tensions, conflicts, and misunderstandingsthat are latent in multicultural work can be addressed openly so com-munity groups can work together more effectively.

Cultural Competence Contract. The Cultural Competence Contract(CCC) is designed to help students acquire skills for developing(1) cultural knowledge of some group, (2) self-knowledge, and (3) ap-plication of the knowledge in terms of implications for communityorganizing with this group. Each student focuses on one specific groupthat differs from the student’s social identity group memberships in atleast one significant dimension, and with which they are not veryfamiliar. To develop cultural knowledge, students are encouraged topursue learning through many avenues, including some that are nottraditionally academic. For example, they may learn about the groupby attending events (including religious or spiritual occasions), con-ducting personal interviews, reading (novels and magazines, as well as

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


biographies, non-fiction, and articles), and use of other media such asmovies, videos, or television. Readings from Green (1995) and otherson multicultural awareness provide students with background on howto engage in this type of learning.

To gain self knowledge, students critically assess their involvementwith the group they selected by responding to questions such as: Whydid I select this group for my focus? What is my previous experiencewith this group? What did I learn about this group when I was growingup? What differences and similarities do I see between myself andindividuals in this community? To what degree do I embrace or havedifficulty with traditional values of this group, and how can this affectmy work with this group? How did I feel when interacting with mem-bers of this group? How did they interact with me? How did theyappear to perceive me? How do I feel about this--as an individual andas a professional?

Finally, based on what they have learned about the group, them-selves, and themselves in relation to the group, students are asked toconsider the implications for community organizing with this group.They address this question from both a general perspective and forthemselves specifically, including an assessment of what would betheir strengths and opportunities, as well as their obstacles and chal-lenges. Students summarize these learnings in handouts that are sharedwith other class participants.

Results from this assignment have been impressive, both in terms offactual knowledge gained and shared, and self-knowledge acquired.One of its interesting byproducts is that it demonstrates the irony andimpracticality of its title, since true cultural ‘‘competence’’ is an un-realistic goal for a one-semester project. It underscores that we learnabout various cultures to increase the range of options for workingwith people and the importance of never assuming that any particularcultural patterns apply to a given individual. As students engage in theprocess and begin to understand the multiple levels of learning requiredfor cultural competence, it reinforces for them the complexity of cul-ture, its fluidity and variability, and the dangers inherent in makingassumptions and stereotyping. This can be an illuminating and hum-bling experience that can start students on a path for future learning.

Action project. The action project is a group project that, like theCCC, culminates in a class presentation. Students are clustered aroundinterests and access to appropriate projects, and time is provided dur-

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


ing the class for them to form groups and develop their projects.During the first few weeks of class, they complete a preliminarycommitment that includes describing what they propose to do; withwhat agency, organization, or community; why; and how it qualifies asan action project for multicultural, multilingual community organiz-ing. They are asked to begin to sketch out how group members willdivide responsibilities; the schedule of work and the presentation date;the group and individual learning goals in connection with the project;and criteria for what will constitute ‘‘success’’ for the project. We havefound that requiring specificity at an early stage of the project ispivotal for minimizing subsequent intragroup tension and difficultiesdue to miscommunication and differing expectations about purpose,product, and workload distribution.

This project provides students with the opportunity for hands-onexperience in identifying and practicing community organizing strate-gies and tactics from a multicultural perspective. At the same time,they wrestle with the personal and professional issues it presents. Theystruggle to develop or expand relationships that will offer access toprojects, and to define projects and roles for themselves that will beultimately constructive and useful despite the limitations of their timeand status. Their experiences are put into perspective based on theliterature on multicultural practice, such as the framework presentedby Rivera and Erlich (1995) that recommends different levels of in-volvement with communities of color based on organizer profile, in-cluding cultural, racial, and linguistic identity. After experiencingfirsthand some of the challenges and contradictions inherent in work-ing with groups different from themselves, some students use theirnew awareness to help reconsider career goals and directions.

Action projects require students to connect classroom learning tothe ‘‘real world.’’ They can thus experience, within the ‘‘protectedenvironment’’ of the course, the challenges and opportunities inherentin multicultural work. This will mean learning to work in a multicul-tural task group, to take risks and to evaluate their own process.Students in this class have risen to this challenge. Action projectsinclude: organizing an information table in the School of Social Workfor Gay and Lesbian History Week, surveying students and faculty onmulticultural content in the curriculum, conducting focus groups onthe impact of ‘‘welfare reform’’ on child care accessibility, and present-ing a workshop on racism for volunteers at a local homeless shelter.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


At the culmination of the action projects, the groups create classactivities or two-hour presentations that share information and demon-strate practice principles derived from the projects. This is their oppor-tunity to display the ‘‘skill’’ aspect of multicultural practice. The focusis on both understanding tactics for community practice and bringingthem into action. Students must go beyond the challenge of identifyingwhat they have done and what they have learned, and must alsodevelop methods for communicating that learning to others.

Students have shown a great deal of creativity in these presenta-tions. Often, in their enthusiasm, they go beyond the two-hour timeframe. Examples of class presentations have included a field trip to acommunity board hearing on the Detroit Empowerment Zone, a panelof activists working with rural Latinos in a neighboring community, anorganized simulation of a community board hearing deciding aboutthe siting of a shelter for homeless families,3 and a PowerpointRpresentation demonstrating principles of multicultural communityplanning issues. These presentations typically focus both on a specificmethod of community organization practice (e.g., coalition building,community education) and one or more specific populations (e.g.,Latinos, African American men, lesbian parents). In this way all stu-dents have focused learning that relates to specific ethnic, racial, orgender groups.

Final paper, including PRACSIS. The final paper provides the op-portunity for students to synthesize and assess their learning over thesemester. One component calls for students to complete an analysis ofthemselves in a multicultural interaction. The format for this is aframework called ‘‘PRACSIS’’ (Alvarez, 1999), developed to facili-tate thoughtful and thorough critical consciousness and application topractice (Reed et al., 1997). PRACSIS is an acronym for ‘‘PractitionerReflection on Actions, Characteristics, and Situation by Impact andStrategies.’’ It is designed to provide a concrete framework within whichstudents and others can assess their praxis, the concept introduced byPaulo Freire (1970, 1974, 1996) to capture the dialectical interactionbetween action and reflection.

Students often find it difficult to reflect on the relationship of theirpersonal characteristics to their practice choices and effectiveness. ThePRACSIS model was developed to increase the clarity and concrete-ness of critical consciousness and the purposive use of self by specify-ing the components and sequence of the analysis. It can be used with

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


students and practitioners, and has the versatility to be adaptable andapplicable under many different circumstances.

For this particular class, students first write a brief narrative de-scription of an actual multicultural interaction they have had, includ-ing the scenario and the actors involved. They are then required to fillout the PRACSIS grid with reference to this scenario, assessing the(1) interrelationships of their actions and characteristics, (2) percep-tions of these by themselves and others, and (3) implications forpractice. Finally, they complete a brief assessment of their learningfrom the exercise. The quality of analysis and discussion based on thisexercise has demonstrated great depth and breadth, and student feedbackhas indicated that it is a very useful tool for both assessment and strategydevelopment.

CONCLUSIONS

Impact of the Course

It is important that we understand the outcomes of this course on manylevels. The intent is to have a positive impact on students, the community,and the faculty teaching the course. In both formal and informal evalua-tions we have found impact to occur on these three levels.

Within the course, impacts on students are measured by assess-ments of learning on assignments, by the completion of anonymousmid-term and end-of-term course evaluations, and through exercisesthat provide immediate and anonymous feedback in the final classsession. Through these efforts, students have reported many differentdimensions of learning. The students identified Cultural CompetenceContracts and intergroup dialogue exercises and action projects asparticularly important. Students answered the ‘‘most important’’ thingthey learned in the class: ‘‘learning that we are all teachers, learners,community members, and organizers’’; ‘‘to be able to learn, under-stand, and self-evaluate myself and others in the social work profes-sion and of different cultures’’; ‘‘recognition of the simultaneous, anddialectical, existence of multiple identities and levels of practice/ac-tion’’; and ‘‘how to implement the various theories into actual work.’’

This course has also significantly affected communities, organiza-tions, and our School of Social Work. This can best be measured by

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


the impact that the action projects have had on these systems outsideof class. Students have engaged in action projects that have providedmulticultural education in organizations, have organized an affirma-tive action group in our school, have conducted culturally competentaction research and have published their term papers in social workjournals.4 In these ways projects from this course have had an impacton the practice of social work.

This course has also had a significant effect on the instructors.Through teaching this course we have learned much about multi-culturalism and its practice in communities. Students have devel-oped useful exercises for their class presentations that we havebeen able to incorporate into our teaching. The interaction with adynamic, motivated, and challenging group of students has led us toreconsider much of our thinking about multicultural practice. In-deed, this course has been a model for how co-learning and co-teaching can take place.

Implications

In this paper we have focused primarily on the structure and effec-tiveness of one specific course on multicultural community organiz-ing. We recognize that courses such as this one are relatively rare inour BSW and MSW curricula. Therefore, social work educators areencouraged to consider ways to incorporate these perspectives, meth-ods, and exercises throughout the social work curriculum. The authorshave found this to be both feasible and beneficial. For example, wehave had experience using exercises such as PRACSIS and the actionproject in foundation macro practice courses, and the group presenta-tions with multicultural focus have been used in advanced generalistBSW and MSW practice courses. When this content was infused intothese courses, students welcomed the challenge and concrete assis-tance involved in multicultural learning.

Learning to select tactics that are appropriate for the issue andcommunity context is a crucial skill for organizers (Netting, Kettner,& McMurty, 1995). Our literature in this area has most often focusedon analyzing ways in which the issues and characteristics of the targetand action systems affect the development of tactics. In this paper wehave focused on ways in which an awareness of multicultural dynam-ics and issues can be incorporated into considering and determining

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


the use of tactics. The methods that we have described, that involveboth self-knowledge and understanding of others, have resulted in im-proving students’ capacity to work effectively with diverse communi-ties.

NOTES

1. Participants in this initial working group included Barry Checkoway, BethReed, Edith Lewis, Zulema Suarez, Ratnesh Nagda and Helen Weingarten. Other in-dividuals also participated by providing input and consultation in the course develop-ment process.

2. Marti Bombyk developed this group technique for problem solving and build-ing empathy for a Women’s Studies course, Women in the Community. In that exer-cise, the topic is ‘‘My greatest fear in my community internship.’’ The authors haveadapted a variant of this exercise to prepare students for fieldwork, as well.

3. Directions for use of this simulation have been posted on the website associatedwith this course, which can be accessed at http://www.ssw.umich.edu/.

4. A recent publication (Hoffman, 1997) was originally developed as part of anaction project for this course.

REFERENCES

Albrecht, L. & Brewer, R.M. (Eds.). (1990). Bridges of power: Women’s multicultur-al alliances. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.

Alvarez, A.R. (1999, March). PRACSIS: A framework for developing critical con-sciousness and implications for strategy. Paper presented for the ACOSA Sympo-sium at the 45th Annual Program Meeting of the Council on Social Work Educa-tion, San Francisco, CA. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Alvarez, A. R. & Gutiérrez, L. (1997, March). A MOSAIC of voices: Multiculturalorganizers sharing approaches for inclusive communities. Paper presented for theACOSA Symposium at the 43rd Annual Program Meeting of the Council onSocial Work Education, Chicago, IL.

Bradshaw, C., Soifer, S., & Gutiérrez, L. (1993). Toward a hybrid model for effectiveorganizing in communities of color. Journal of Community Practice, 1, 25-42.

Burghardt, S. (1982). The other side of organizing. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.Burnette, D. (1997). Grandmother caregivers in inner-city Latino families: A de-

scriptive profile and informal social supports. Journal of Multicultural SocialWork, 5 (3/4), 121-137.

Carlton-LaNey, I. & Andrews, J. (1998). Direct practice: Addressing gender in practicefrom a multicultural feminist perspective. In J. Figueira-McDonough, F.E. Netting, &A. Nichols-Casebolt (Eds.), The role of gender in practice knowledge: Claiminghalf the human experience (pp. 93-125). New York: Taylor & Francis.

Carlton-LaNey, I., & Burwell, N.Y. (Eds.). (1996). African American communitypractice models: Historical and contemporary responses. New York: The Ha-worth Press, Inc.

Chow, E.N-L. (1989). The feminist movement: Where are all the Asian American

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


women? In Asian Women United of California (Eds.), Making waves: An antholo-gy of writings by and about Asian American women (pp. 362-377). Boston, MA:Beacon Press.

Davis, L., & Proctor, E. (1989). Race, gender and class: Guidelines for practice withindividuals, families, and groups. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Delgado, M., & Humm-Delgado, D. (1982). Natural support systems: Source ofstrength in Hispanic communities. Social Work, 27, 83-89.

Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating otherpeople’s children. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 280-298.

Devore, W. & Schlesinger, E.G. (1987). Ethnic-sensitive social work practice. Co-lumbus: Merrill.

Figueira-McDonough, J., Netting, F. E., & Nichols-Casebolt, A. (Eds.). (1998). Therole of gender in practice knowledge: Claiming half the human experience. NewYork: Taylor & Francis.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.Freire, P. (1974). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum.Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of hope: Reliving pedagogy of the oppressed. NY: Con-

tinuum.Gallegos, J. (1984). The ethnic competence model for social work education. In

White, B. (Ed), Color in a white society. Silver Spring, MD: NASW.Garcia, B. & Van Soest, D. (1997). Changing perceptions of diversity and oppres-

sion: MSW students discuss the effects of a required course. Journal of SocialWork Education, 33 (1), 119-129.

Green, J. (1995). Cultural awareness in the human services: A multi-ethnic approach(2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Gutiérrez, L. (1996). Understanding the empowerment process: Does consciousnessmake a difference? Social Work Research, 19 (4), 229-237.

Gutiérrez, L., Alvarez, A.R., Nemon, H., & Lewis, E. (1996). Multicultural commu-nity organizing: A strategy for change. Social Work, 41 (5), 501-508.

Gutiérrez, L. & Lewis, E. (1994). Community organizing with women of color: Afeminist approach. Journal of Community Practice, 1, 23-44.

Heskin, A., & Heffner, R. (1987). Learning about bilingual, multicultural organizing.The Journal of Applied Behavioral Sciences, 23, 525-541.

hooks, b. (1984). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Boston, MA: South End Press.Iglehart, A.P. & Becerra, R.M. (1995). Social services and the ethnic community.

Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Kam, P-K. (1996). Empowering elderly people: A community work approach. Com-

munity Development Journal, 31 (3), 230-240.Lum, D. (1992). Social work and people of color: A process-stage approach. Pacific

Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.McGuire, J.F. (1994). Organizing from diversity in the name of community: Lessons

from the disability civil rights movement. Policy Studies Journal, 22 (1), 112-122.McMahon, A. & Allen-Meares, P. (1992). Is social work racist? Social Work, 37 (6),

533-539.Medoff, P. & Sklar, H. (1994). Streets of hope: The fall and rise of an urban neigh-

borhood. Boston: South End Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014


Munoz, C. (1989). Youth identity and power: The Chicano movement. London: Verso.Netting, E., Kettner, P., & McMurty, S. (1995). Selecting appropriate tactics. In J.

Tropman, J. Erlich & J. Rothman (Eds). Tactics and techniques of communityintervention. Itasca, IL: Peacock.

Reed, B.G., Newman, P.A., Suarez, Z.E., & Lewis, E.A. (1997). Interpersonal prac-tice beyond diversity and toward social justice: The importance of critical con-sciousness. In C.D. Garvin & B.A. Seabury (Eds.), Interpersonal practice insocial work: Promoting competence and social justice (2nd ed., pp. 44-78). Need-ham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Rivera, F. & Erlich, J. (1995). Community organizing in a diverse society (2nd ed.).Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Rosenthal, D.B. (1996). Gay and lesbian political mobilization and regime respon-siveness in four New York cities. Urban Affairs Review, 32 (1), 45-70.

Schoem, D., Frankel, L., Zuniga, X., & Lewis, E. (Eds.). (1993). Multiculturalteaching in the university. Westport, CT: Praeger.

Silverman, S. (1997). ‘‘On Our Own, Charlottesville, Virginia.’’ In C.T. Mowbray,D.P. Moxley, C.A. Jasper, & L.L. Howell (Eds.), Consumers as providers inpsychiatric rehabilitation (pp. 126-141). Columbia, MD: International Associa-tion of Psychosocial Rehabilitation Services.

Stout, L. (1996). Bridging the class divide and other lessons for grassroots organiz-ing. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Van Soest, D. (1994). Social work education for multicultural practice and socialjustice advocacy: A field study of how students experience the learning process.Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 3 (1), 17-24.

Weil, M. (1986). Women, community, and organizing. In N. Van Den Bergh & L.B.Cooper (Eds.), Feminist visions for social work (pp. 187-210). Silver Springs,MD: NASW.

Weiler, K. (1994). Freire and a feminist pedagogy of difference. In P. McLaren (Ed.),Politics of liberation: Paths from Freire. New York: Routledge.

West, G. (1990). Cooperation and conflict among women in the welfare rights move-ment. In L. Albrecht & R. Brewer (Eds.), Bridges of power: Women’s multicultur-al alliances. 149-171. Philadelphia, PA: New Society Publishers.

Zuniga, X. & Nagda, B. (1993). Dialogue groups: An innovative approach to multi-cultural learning. In D. Schoem et al. (Eds.), Multicultural teaching in the univer-sity. New York: Praeger.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Nor

thea

ster

n U

nive

rsity

] at

16:

59 0

3 N

ovem

ber

2014

educating students for multicultural community practice

Documents